tv Today in Washington CSPAN September 12, 2012 2:00am-6:00am EDT
[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [applause] >> dr. teresa sullivan is the eighth president of the university of virginia, home of the older student-run honor system under which students pledge not to lie, cheat or steal. dr. sullivan was previously the provost and executive of private affairs. and an executive vice chancellor for academic affairs for the university of essex system. she focuses on labor force
tomography, with particular emphasis on economic marginality and consumer debt. the co-author of six books and numerous scholarly articles. her most recent work explores the question of who filed for bankruptcy and why. in addition to her service to institutions of higher learning, she has also served as chair of the u.s. census advisory committee, secretary of the american sociological association, and as a fellow of the american association for the advancements of science. her lecture this morning is "how can we maintain a culture of honor and integrity?" those who cheat and those who might come up please welcome another texan to chautauqua. [applause]
>> good morning to all of view. for those of you who are uva alumni, wahua. [applause] i am pleased to have this opportunity to speak at the chautauqua institution. let me again by saying how much i admire all of you for your dedication of the principles of lifelong learning. plenty of americans choose to spend their summers dozing on the beach or relaxing on some other vacation spot. there's nothing wrong with the dozing on vacation. but when you came here, you may be different choice. by spending your time at chautauqua, engaged in education and the arts, as well as in the study of religion and recreation, you embody the principles of self improvement and lifelong learning. the principles that motivated
the founders of the chautauqua institution to create this place in 1974. this is a productive way to spend your summer and i am pleased to be part of your program. those of you who attended this lecture series all week have heard from several distinguished speakers. all of them have addressed this game "ethics of cheating" in bringing a variety perspectives on the topic. as a teacher and university professor as well as being a university president, i take a special interest in cheating. as you might imagine. and i have some strong opinions about it. in case you're wondering, i am against it. [laughter] this morning, i want to frame the question that will help us examine the topic of cheating from a constructive perspective. the question is -- how can we
build and maintain a culture of honor and integrity? being a university president for the past two years and a college professor and the administrator for more than three decades, i am best qualified to talk about honor and integrity in the context of the college campus. but i will also discuss some ways that a campus culture of honor carries over to the real world beyond the ivory tower. to start our discussion, i wanted to consider a word. this word did not really exist until 2005. it was popularized by a tv host in the pilot episode of his new prime-time comedy program. it quickly enter the public consciousness and took its place in the lexicon of popular language.
it was written about in newspapers and magazines. and it was talked about on news programs. it was named "word of the year" by the american dialect society. and the executive secretary of the american dialect society get very worked up when describing it. like astronomers witnessing the birth of a nova, he wrote, we are watching the infancy of a new word the has the possibility of becoming a permanent addition to the vocabulary. global language monitoring organizations that track trends and languages around the world named it one of the talk pt buzz words of the year. it was the most looked up word in merriam-webster is on-line dictionary in 2005. and five years after its debut, it received the ultimate stamp of approval when it entered the
new oxford american dictionary. the word, of course, was " truthiness"introduced by maughan funded steven colbert in his program "the colbert report." he said truthiness is what you want the facts to be as opposed to what the facts are. what feels like the right answer as opposed to what reality will support. [laughter] global language monitor defined it more simply as truth unencumbered by the facts. [laughter] the idea of it seem to capture
the zeitgeist in 2005. over the years, it has continued to resonate as the perfect description for not the truth exactly, but the facsimile of truth. the approximation of truth that we sometimes allow to pass for genuine truth. if anyone holds a vote for the word of the decade, i'm sure that truthiness will be at the top of the list. so how do we create a culture of honor and integrity in the age of truthiness? as you know, i am the president of the university of virginia, a top tier of the university in central virginia. in two weeks, an annual rite of passage will occur when about 4000 families will bring their first-year college students to charlottesville to begin their
undergraduate studies at uva. the same thing will happen at colleges and universities all over the country. these new college students were 10 or 11 years old in 2005 when steven colbert calling his new word. this means these young people have come of age in the age of truthiness. two historians, william sousstrs and neil house, have written extensively about this generation, which includes everyone born since 1980. through their research, they found a few key traits that characterize students in this age group. let me share some of the streets. they are -- some of those traits. they are confident. in recent decades, children have become much more involved in the
lives of their kids, as many of you know, i'm sure. this has given young people lots of support and, as a result, fostered their self-confidence. they are a team-oriented and tear-oriented. the milan else have grown up in a diverse american population -- the millennials have grown up in a diverse american population and are less me-oriented than generation andn are more likely to look to their peers for approval. they are pressured. there are over-scheduled, over- tutored, over-coached, over- managed and over-driven to succeed among their peers. in large part, this is because of the increased pressure to get into a top tier college. and finally, they are high achieving. they are future-oriented and
focused on long-term career success, even at the ripe age of 18. most of these characteristics can be positive when properly directed. but you can see how the tendencies and attitudes could drive college students to succeed at any cost, even if it means cutting corners in college or sacrificing their principles of right and wrong. teachers and administrators at america's colleges and universities want to create a culture of honor at on our campuses, but it is a tall task because our students are facing tremendous societal pressures that can push them to cheat because new technologies are making it easier for students who choose to cheat and because we live in a culture in which the supremacy of truthiness
is so widely acknowledge that we made it the word of the year. we will look at who cheats on our college campuses, how they cheat and why they cheat. how emerging technologies have made cheating easier and have college leaders are working to stop cheating. that is the dark side of the honor question. but we will also look at the bright side. i will discuss how honor codes and other student-run on our initiatives create communities of trust in which communities are driven to act honorably and honestly on their own without administrators peering over their shoulders. let me begin by quantifying the number and type of college students to cheat. way back in 1964, william barr's conducted a groundbreaking study of college cheating. he surveyed over 5000 students on 99 devore campuses and his results probably scared the daylights out of an entire generation of teachers and
parents. he reported that three-fourths of the students had engaged in some form of academic dishonesty. three professors, donald mccabe of rutgers, linda trevino of penn state, and another from washington state had been dusted research for the past decade to -- had conducted research for the past decade to follow-up on william bowers research. they became interested in college cheating because they wanted to understand the ethical inclinations of today's college students, the very people who will become tomorrow's business leaders. in 1997, there replicated the 1964 study and found only a modest overall increase in cheating. they found dramatic increase in three areas cheating on tests and exams, cheating among women, and collaborative
cheating on written assignments. other large-scale studies have reinforced the notion that cheating is rampant. in a met analysis of 107 cheating studies conducted between 1970 and 1996, 70% of students on average had engaged in various cheating behavior's, including 43% who admitted to cheating on exams and 47% who admitted to plagiarism. other smaller studies have delivered similar results. in a survey at santa clara university, 83% of students admitted to some form of cheating. by the way, santa clara is a catholic university run by jesuits. [laughter] research has shown that, while most students believe cheating is wrong and ought to be punished, most of these same students still cheap. a study published this spring
by a student fares professional group highlighted this double standard -- by a student affairs professional group highlighted this double standard. these students seem to believe that cheating offenses should be measured on a sliding scale. they say they do most of their cheating on homework, not tests and integrity and honor should be applied differently to hallmark as compared to exams. of those who cheated, 60% of them indicated they had cheated on homework. while only 19% had cheated on an exam. the 30% said they cheated on both. the arizona study also revealed some interesting cultural classifications among students to cheat and those who don't. for example, the survey found the highest rates of cheating among fraternity and sorority members and among international
students. cheating was least widespread among three groups -- students receiving need-based aid, non- degree seeking students, and first-generation students. here is one survey that steven colbert can have fun with. the more highly educated the students' parents work, the more likely he or she was to cheat. [laughter] this seems to suggest that a sense of entitlement plays some role in cheating. those who feel most entitled to cheat will do so. while those who feel least entitled do not. it would be interesting to do a follow-up study to find out how many highly educated parents of college cheaters were cheaters themselves when they would -- when they were in college. talk about a legacy. [laughter] here is another interesting fact. the students who reported the lowest levels of cheating or the newest students, the freshman.
after that first year, the likelihood that students had cheated increase from year to year at an almost liberate. this seems to suggest that, -- and almost linear rate. this seems to suggest that, if we can instill honor and accountability earlier in their college years, it might help us to trade the culture of water that we desire. so why do students cheat? seeking an answer to this question, mccabe and trivia conducted a step in -- a study of 61,000 students at 31 college universities. they found that pierre behavior was the strongest variable when -- that peer behavior was the strongest unbearable when students chose to achieve. it may suggest that academic dishonesty not only is learned from observing the behavior appears -- of peers, but that
peer behavior provides a normative approach cheating may come to be viewed as an acceptable way of getting and staying ahead. in other words, students who start cheating doucette to level the playing field with their classmates who are -- do so to level the playing field with their classmates who are already cheating. a cheating student ever to cheats in order to keep up to cheating student number one. then chiemsee and no. 3 sheets in order to keep up with a cheating stood no. 2. imagine a student going to and examine economics 101 and going to a multiple drawers question to which he has no clue. it would seem acceptable because
he considers world dominance as his natural birthright and god- given destiny. [laughter] and so begins the process of rationalization and creative excuse-making, a process known as the neutralization deviance. in the 1950's, two sociologists studied juvenile delinquents to find out why they do the bad things they do. they discovered that the delinquents often realized that the laws they routinely break are correct and necessary. but they develop sophisticated rationale to excuse their own mischief. the researchers named five neutralization techniques that delinquent used to explain away their behavior and to protect themselves from guilt and self blame. the justifications are -- denial
of responsibility. in this scenario, the delinquent believes that is deviant acts are the result of outside forces beyond his control, such as overbearing parents, for high school teachers, and so on. it is not his fault. it is their fault. the nile of injury -- hear the delinquent believes that nobody is really hurt by his misbehavior. so what is the harm? denial of the victim -- the delinquent believes that come even if other people are being hurt by his deviant behavior, they somehow deserve it. they were asking for it. fourth, condemnation of the contenders -- in this technique, the delinquent shifts technique from his own axe to those who disapprove of the acts, blaming them for the situation. and finally, the appeal to
higher loyalty -- in this situation, the building would feels justified in ignoring the rules of society at large in order to meet the demands of a smaller social group to whom he feels loyal, friends or siblings, for example. the delinquent may recognize that society's rules are reasonable, but his higher lotis compel him to break the rules anyway -- is higher of loyalties compel him to break the rules anyway. i am not suggesting that college students hoochy are comparable to delinquent, stealing hubcaps and shoplifting the bbs at the shopping mall. but college cheaters use most of the same neutralization techniques to justify their behavior. this last technique, the appeal to higher loyalty, was evident in the steady and mentioned that santa clara and university when 75% of the students who cheated said it was because they wanted to please their parents by getting good grades.
the delinquency researchers found that the neutralization techniques were not powerful enough to overcome ingrained moral values because juvenile delinquents frequently suffer guilt and shame on their filing called to account for their behavior. the same is probably true for college students who get caught cheating and called before judicial boards. by then, ladies usually too late to make amends. -- usually -- by then, it is usually too late to make amends. so how do students cheat? let me count the ways. researchers conducted a 1993 study that tallied in the cheating activities reported by students in various surveys through the years. the laundry list includes -- copying from another student's exam, taking an exam for someone
else, purchasing term papers, copying papers without the noting, baking a list to avoid an exam, using notes or books during an exam when prohibited, reviewing a selling copy of an exam, giving test questions to students in another class, developing a personal relationship with the instructor for the purpose of getting test information, downright bribery and blackmail, hiring a ghostwriter, altering or forging official university documents, and collaborating on homework or take-home exams when the instructions required independent work. this last points to a common gray area for students. at uva and at most colleges around the country, we promote collaboration as a desirable and productive way to work.
we want everyone to break down silos, reach across disciplines and work together, to collaborate. but the distinguished -- but the distinction is difficult for some students and some do not understand the fundamental concept of fair use, plagiarism, and legitimate collaboration as opposed to academic dishonesty, masquerading as collaboration. discrepancies between the studys of bowers's 1964 and mckay venturing out shows the attitudes about how collaboration has changed over the years. when asked if they worked together on assignments when the professor had explicitly forbidden such cooperation, 49% said yes in 1993. does it mean that fewer students participated in for been
collaboration back in the 1960's? or does it means that more students nowadays admit doing it simply because they think it is acceptable? i think inadequate communication is a part of the problem. faculty members rarely discussed their expectations of academic dishonesty in the classroom. even if the university has clear policies on cheating, individual instructors handle cheating on an individual basis. one study showed that 60% of faculty members to observe some kind of cheating, only 30% complied to the policy of the university level. i will talk more about the need for faculty and administrators to communicate effectively about cheating and honor in a few minutes. first, i want to continue my list of ways to cheat by turning to the internet.
the rise of the internet and other new technologies has presented opportunities for cheating that would have been inconceivable to my generation. smart funds have become the new crib sheets -- smart phones have become the new crib sheets. the university testing center at the university of central florida is a good example of a new hard-line tactics. at the testing center, students are not allowed to chew gum during exams. why? because gum chewing could disguise a students mouth movements when he is overly speaking into a handsfree cellphone to an outside cheating accomplice. [applause] the two hundred plus computers in the testing center are reset into the project are recessed
into the desk. if a student tries to photograph the tests with a hand-held device, he will be easily caught. all the students are monitoring by i guess in-the-sky video cameras with a test proctor keeping a close eye on the bank of the images in the next room. if the proper sees a student doing something suspicious, he instantly begins recording the student's computer work in real time and directs an overhead camera to zoom in on the student. all of these images and data are burned onto a cd for possible future use as evidence. this testing situation sounds more like the cia interrogation room. [applause] the sophistication of technology for students to cheat has forced administrators into a prison guard mentality. one simple innovation made
cheating much easier than it used to be. until about 13 years ago, in order to plagiarize, students had to copy somebody's work, word for word, sentence for sentence. but in 1981, apple released a new computer called aliso which had a graphical user interface. prior to lisa, you had to type in the commands. but lisa came with a mouse that allowed the user to click on graphics and highlight text on the screen. this feature, combined with standardized keyboard shortcuts, made it easier for users to cut and paste or copy and paste. suddenly, plagiarizing was a breeze. now, in the span of 2 minutes, it is possible to search for an online copy of the "war and
peace," copy and paste the text into your own document, and slap your name on to the page. take that, tolstoy. [laughter] in this short cut, with limited unlimited -- combined with unlimited information on the internet, companies have formed a whole new cottage industry in the last few years. 55% of colleges and universities now use one of these services. for-credit courses offered online can become easy pickings for tech savvy cheers. -- tech savvy cheaters. out in the spring semester of 2012, last semester, a student
received an a on an on-line science course. he managed to do this in spite of the fact that he never read the course materials and never studied the textbook. the only time he spent on the class was the 30 minutes he spent taking the required weekly test. the professor used in testing system that probe questions at random from a pool of possible questions. students could take the test anywhere, but had only a short window of time in which to take them. a window small enough, the professor believed, to keep the students from looking of the answers on line. the resource will student, together with his four friends, found a way to cheat by using google.com a web-based word- processing file that all of them to share what taking the tests. the student and his friends took the test, pasted the questions into the shared google doc including the answers.
they went through the questions one at a time. the first student often did poorly since he had never seen the material before. but the next student usually did better thanks to the google doc g sheet. and the next students did even better. in this course, the students were allowed to take the test twice. each of the tudors took turns going first. sec -- each of the cheaters took turns going first. so they all ended up getting good grades. they were all guaranteed in a at the end. the anonymous student told "the chronicle," we are doing very well.
professors are using technology to their own advantage to catch cheaters. in 2001, university of virginia professor named louis blues failed realize that students in his introductory physics class were turning in identical 15--- 1500-word papers over the course of several semesters. the introductory class was so large, with 300-500 students each semester. once he became suspicious, he created a computer program. after running the papers through the program, he realized that as many as 122 students may have plagiarized their papers. uva aggressively prosecuted the legend played dreiser's and agiariplayed your -- plea
zers and expels one-third of them. it was an especially big story for one reason. uva has a longstanding and why did mired code of honor. so i will spend the next few minutes talking about honor codes and how they affect students and their attitudes about academic cheating. most honor codes following standard formula with slight variations. students take a pledge to not lie, cheat or steal and to not allow students to do so. students who run afoul of the system usually face a student- run judicial process. uva established in 1842.
when our students arrive as first-year students, they sign a pledge not to lie, cheat or steal, which includes charlottesville, the surrounding county or where they represent themselves as university students. because of this commitment, there is a strong degree of trust within our community. you can go to the library and leave your laptop sitting unguarded on a desk when you go looking for a book in the stacks. when you return, your laptop will still be there. it harks back to the innocent days when people could leave their cars unlocked in their driveways. some of us remember those days. one of the distinctive qualities of honor systems is that they are run by students, not by faculty or administrators. our board of visitors have delegated responsibility for the honor system to the students. i play no role in that system, except that i can be asked by the honor council to convene the
general faculty to revoke the degree if it has already been granted. in the two years i have been at virginia, i have done that twice. in both cases, the graduating students cheated on a final exam in every last semester. they were granted the degree, but the honor committee was aware of the violation, subsequently held a trial and convict them and it was upheld on appeal and the university did revoke those two degrees. but that is the only role i play, when the decree has already been granted. otherwise, the honor fences are presented to the honor committee, which is a judiciary body composed completely of students. students are recruited and trained by the audit committee to serve as advisers and provide counsel to the committee. students also investigate monarch allegations, and work with accused students in their defense at the trial. the jury is composed of
students. while anyone can initiate the honor proceedings by filing an accusation, the process itself is administered completely by students. on a side note, some people seem to think that thomas jefferson created the honor system when he created the university. but that is not true. self-government's began with an ugly incident in the uterus these early years, several years after thomas jefferson's death. on the night of november 12, 1840, after a while a student shenanigans, a masked students shot and killed a popular law -- law professor named john davis who had come outside to try to get the students under control. ashamed of their misbehavior, the students agreed to a plan for which they accounted for themselves and each other. in the same spirit, the faculty established an honor pledge on examinations, agreeing to trust
students when they pledged that they had been received nor give assistance on their school work. other schools have the honor code, including military academies. many colleges and universities across the country have tier--- have peer-enforced codes of honor. of course, many of our colleges and universities do not have honor codes or systems of self- government. instead, they rely on faculty and administrators to try to impose honor and integrity on the students. so how successful are these respective approaches to creating a culture of honor and integrity? william bowers's study found lower rates of cheating at schools with honor codes. one study found that students at honors -- arco schools were
less likely to sheet or rationalize any cheating that did manage to and more likely to talk about the importance of integrity. students in honor codes schools seem to honor the freedoms and privileges of the honor code environment. in 1999, mccabe and colleagues conducted a study determining whether honor codes made a difference in levels of cheating and why it on a committee difference. they found that they have a profound impact on student attitude about academic honesty. they wrote, "students at institutions with honor codes frame the issue of academic integrity in a fundamentally different way from students at non-code institutions. although on a code students feel the same pressures from a larger society from their non-
colleagues, they are significantly less likely to use such pressures to rationalize or justify their own cheating. rather, they refer to the honor code as an interval part of a culture of integrity that permits there institution -- as an interval part of a culture of integrity that permeates their institution." it builds a sense of community in which students feel accountable for their own behavior and accountable for the integrity of the entire school. students who cheat me believe they are leveling the playing field in a cheating-for-all environment. students who had here to an honor code believe they are leveling the playing field with an honesty-for-all environment. honor codes can have long-term effects on the behavior of students. years after they leave their
campuses and embark on a professional careers. one study showed that dishonest behavior in the workplace was lower for participants who had graduated from honor-coat schools. the results also showed that -- honor code schools. results also showed that dishonesty in the workplace could also be reduced by having a code of conduct. another study has reinforced the idea that the code of conduct has a significant impact on employee behavior. in this survey, 62% of employees who work with a company with a code of conduct believed it had helped shape their behavior or directed their decision-making. 76% said the code helped employees understand the company's values 0.82% said they apply their knowledge of the code of ethics in their job. just as the campus honor code shapes student behavior, a corporate code of ethics can shape employee behavior. this is much needed today
because our college examples get a bad example from the ranks of the business people whose ranks they plan to enter after graduation. consider enron, for example. no wonder students cheat in college if they see ceo's and other b at p's cheating. about three weeks ago, i received a letter on how uva's code of honor can have a ripple effect on people's lives. a woman who is not an alumna, a parent or a student connected to uva knew about the honor system. she knew because the mayor of her town is a uva graduate and she admired his leadership. she knew because one of her business clients was an alumnus of uva's graduates school. in the letter, she said she had recently agreed to take the stranger entered her home.
the young man was and americorps vista member who needed a place to stay for a month. when she heard about his situation, she immediately invited him to stay with her. she invited him, she said, because he was a uva graduate and she knew he had lived under the honor code. that alone was sufficient enforcement for her to take this total stranger into her home. uva is kind of like scamming, she wrote in her letter. once you are a scout, -- uva is kind of like scouting, she wrote in her letter. once you are a scout, you are a scout all your life. two interesting anomalies were found and they tell us a story about the true foundation of the community of trust. the researchers found one of the lowest levels of cheating at a school that did not have an honor code and one of the highest level said cheating at a
school but did have long-lasting on a code. the first school did not have a formal honor code, but its leaders had managed to develop and foster a deeply ingrained culture of academic integrity over the years. at this school, administrators and faculty clearly and frequently articulated their ideas about cheating and honor. they talked about their expectations regarding high standards of integrity and they encouraged their students to follow the rules of proper conduct. in contrast, the second school, which had a century-old monaco tradition had done little to communicate the principles of the code to students. they failed to make the honor code a real and deeply ingrained part of the campus culture. and the students cheated in droves. simply having an honor code is not an effective deterrent to campus cheating. an honor code will not make a difference unless it is embedded in the campus culture and
clearly communicated to students so they can embrace it and hold one another accountable for it. conversely, college leaders can build a culture of honor without having an honor code if they can explain their expectations regarding academic honesty and nurture a sense of community based on the moral principles of honor and integrity. the thousands of new college students who will arrive on america's college campuses in a few weeks are beginning an acute phase of their moral development. over the course of the coming years, they will cultivate their beliefs about honor and integrity that will guide the beavers for the rest of their lives. today's college students are tomorrow's business leaders, teachers, investment bankers, and politicians. so this is an opportune moment for our college and university leaders to take the necessary steps to create a culture of honor in the ways we have discussed today.
i would like to close by telling you an anecdote about a dinner i had with the university of virginia graduates last fall. i was in dallas, texas to meet with a number of honor alumni. about eight of us went out to dinner at one of the very best restaurants in dallas. a lovely restaurant and a great chef. pretty pricey meals. and our host spare no expense. we had cocktails, appetizers, very nice entrees, desert, cappuccino. next to us was a table for two with a young couple gazing deeply into each other's eyes. by looking at them, you could tell that this was probably the one night this month that they would do what to a fancy restaurant and they both had hamburgers. [laughter] so i noticed them. then the waiter came with the check and handed it to our
coast who looked at the check and it was a bill for to hamburgers. [laughter] he called loiter back and said, you know, we all went to the university of virginia and you gave us the wrong check. [laughter] that is why i believe an honor code build a long-lasting culture of integrity and honor. thank you for your attention. [applause] >> you know what to do if you have questions. given to the ushers and they will bring them to sophie. cn die will do our best to represent the questions -- she and i will do our best to represent the questions from the
audience. i will start by asking you the question about the students who will appear on campuses in a few weeks. say they are our child or grandchild and they call us in october and say i don't know what overcame me, but i did cheat on this test. what do i do now? right? >> is an important question. it is a moment to learn to take responsibility for your actions. the fact that a student can conceptualize that as "i.t. did" shows they have overcome the rationalization and the neutralization -- "i cheated" shows that they have overcome the rationalization and the neutralization of the behavior. the need to go to the teacher
and said, here is what i did. we have a process of this ad virginia called informed retraction. you can go to the honor committee and say i wish to make an informed retraction. i cheated it and i'm willing to take the consequences. you go to the professor until the professor would you did. that professors punishment sticks, whatever it is. if you go through the honor committee and you are convicted, there's only one sanction, which is expulsion from the university. so we do try to give some benefit to the student who is willing to take responsibility for their own behavior. >> in today's society, what does it mean if you take "responsibility" for some type of an ethical action? >> i think it means, first, that
you have to own it and that is hard to do. most of us become skilled at rationalizing our behavior or what they called neutralizing the behavior. admitting it and owning it is something that is the first step in doing it. i am catholic. we have a highly organized way of doing this. [laughter] it is called the examination of conscience, which is a regular program of looking and what you have done that may have fallen short of your own standards. we need to challenge ourselves to maintain high standards. one way of doing that is by acknowledging and admitting or you have fallen short of the mark, even though the consequences may be hard to take. >> is taking a less technically cheating? and how so? >> i will tell you a true story about a university of virginia now-graduate. he was a young man, a fourth
year student, accepted to medical school. he got the flu and he told the professor, i'm sorry, i cannot take the test. the professor said fine. let's do it next tuesday it your feeling better. next tuesday came and the student actually felt much better, but had not quite steady and called a professor and said, i'm sorry, i am still sick, i cannot take it yet. then he thought about what he had done and he went to the room of the chair of the audit committee and walked in and said, i have done something terrible and i have to make it right." and the chair of the honor council said what did you do. he said, i said i was sick and a wasn't. it was i -- it was a lie. i did it because i had not studied enough. so the process of informed retraction was explained. the young man went to see the professor with great trepidation. he had already been accepted to medical school. it was the same medical school that his father and his
grandfather had gone too. this course was required for medical school. so he went to city professor and said, i told you i was sick. that was a lie. i was not sick. i just was not ready for the test. and the professor gave him an f for the course. and the medical school withdrew his except in spirit but they had an appeals process -- withdrew his acceptance. but they had an appeals process. there were five physicians in white coats and they brought him into a room and said what is your story. so he told them the story. they said, fine, will you please leave the room and we will let you know what we decide. so he left the room, of course come in great anxiety and maybe a little despair. when they called him back in the room, all five of the physicians' stood up and they said, young man, you're the kind of person we need in medicine.
you are readmitted. [applause] >> is their research or evidence of cheating among professors or otherwise among the academy, especially among non-tenured faculty? >> there is a great deal of concern about scientific misconduct. one form of scientific misconduct is plagiarizing, taking the work of another without attribution appeared in another form is making up the data, which is a really serious form of lying. particularly in the medical field, bad decisions might be made about someone's held based on data you made up. so every university now has methods for dealing with allegations of scientific misconduct. we do seek to police it. it does happen. there are journalists that retract articles because they have been found to be plagiarized or the data has been
found to made up, whatever. there is pressure on non-tenured faculty to produce as much published work as they can, but unlike undergrad the students to get good grades. the pressures are certainly there. on the other hand, the penalties are quite serious, too. i believe that most scientists do their best to maintain honest work of high integrity. most delegations of scientific misconduct are even shall not borne out. sometimes -- the plagiarism cases are different. those are usually easier to prove. but data often results are comes from a legitimate error that was made in a computer calculation or something else rather than just making up the data. but there are, unfortunately, cases of people who have fraudulent data and it is a serious issue that we care a lot about with our faculty. >> how does one go on assessing
the word of a student that has expressed an ethical behavior? >> -- unethical behavior? >> part of it is for you to be able to define clearly in your own mind the nature of the behavior and how it affects your relationship with this person. if you can bring yourself to talk about it, i think that helps to clear the air. you may find that what you viewed as unethical, the other person did not. there's often a difference of expectations, a difference of definitions, or maybe that neutralization going on. in the case of an employer- employee, it is different because the issue of continuing to trust this person working for your company is very serious. sometimes, i have to say, it justifies termination. if it is something that is
integral to the core values of your company. furthermore, a manager who will not take that step is often jeopardize in natalie his or her position, but also that -- not only his or her position, but also that of the company. if people had taken a stand earlier, they would have prevented a much more serious and difficult situation than what they had to be eventually deal with. >> how does the uva honor code play in your recent crisis? [applause] i think you have some support for [laughter] you] -- for you here. [laughter] >> in my case, the board of visitors ask me to resign. and i did. .it was important me i made in my public announcement
solely the things that i would be to the benefit of the university and i did not talk about me because i thought it would not be constructive and it would not help. [applause] rather, to my surprise and complete ratification, every constituency of the university rallied. [applause] and was reinstated 16 days later by unanimous vote of the board. what role did the honor code play in this? well, the honor council raised the issue of community of trust and if this was consistent with the community of trust. it did not suggest that anybody had violated the honor code, but the talk about what it meant to have a community of trust. i also made allusions to the
community of trust and said that it was not just for the students, but all this, that we must able to trust each other. the other thing i did when some of the people at the university began to get abusive in their be heated to the dean who had been named in the interim president, i sent a message to the entire community saying that civility is the way we behave but the receipt of virginia and i expect that to continue. the board held an all-night meeting before naming the interim president and that meeting broke up at about 3:00 a.m. and number of people who were protesting were still there on the lawn. and one of the associate deans talk with the one police officer who was there. he said this must have been a terrible night for you. he said, no, not at the university of virginia. if this had happened on the west coast, we would have had riots here and gas masks on. but this is the university of virginia. i was the only police officer on duty tonight.
and i do think that tells you something about our community of civility and trust. >> do you believe that millennials need to understand prior generations work ethics or develop their own? >> i think it is very understand -- it is very important for them to understand because it is likely that there balls will not be in monilial and it is important for them to understand the reactions of other generations to them and their somewhat different take on things. i teach a class in the january term called sociology of working which i work with 164-year students. one group of my students did a study of the millennials in the workplace. in one case, they really are having trouble because they do not understand the baby boomer or younger managers have.
so there probably is room for more cross-generational understanding that we have right now. >> what happens to students who have their diplomas rescinded? >> first of all, let me say that the honor code is not a capricious process. it is in fourth with a good bit of due process. eventually, the student receives a letter that says your transcript will note that your degree has been revoked and you may not represent yourself as a graduate of the university of virginia. that is it. for a student who is expelled in the course of study, we will try to help them relocate to another college or university on the theory that, although they have broken trust with our community, they deserve to have a second chance at another community. we explain the circumstances and the of the college has to understand and accept them. >> how does the academic honor could translate into issues of
alcohol and drug abuse and date rape? >> that is a great question. i would like to say that students are perfectly congruent in their behavior when they are on the university grounds and when they are not. but that is not true. we still have problems with both drug abuse and alcohol abuse, which students tend not to see as falling within the lie, cheat, steal continuing. students do not -- i think most faculty members would. one other area in which i think we have a real difference of opinion in terms of is downloadg copyrighted material. many of our students do not see that as stealing. they don't understand why we do. so, there are areas where we have struggle over the moral
high ground. that is true in virginia as it is elsewhere. >> how do university presidents maintain and safeguard what should be their absolute authority over head coaches and athletic directors? [applause] >> gee, i wonder why that question came up. when i came to uva, i changed the report in line of the athletic director so he reports directly to me, which did not happen in the previous administration. i thought i needed to know what was going on in the athletic program. i also make it a habit to sit down with the head coaches and talk with them one-on-one about the issues they have, and also my expectations for the academic program their student athletes follow. i found the coaches welcome this, enjoy talking to me about it, and i will tell you about my
last such interview with mike london, our third-year head football coaching. -- coach. i sat down with him. he said, do you think you'll be changing the times class is made? i said i did not think we would need to do that. he said, i went to meet the registrar. i made a mental note, head coach knows where registrar is. he asked to see how many glasses were being offered at every hour. what i saw was that, because we were having practiced in the afternoon, my guys were being cut out of electives they wanted to take. there were few classes offered at 8:00 in the morning. we moved practice from the afternoon to 8:00 a.m. the guys all have to be there for breakfast at 6:30, and by 10:00, they're finished and ready to go to class
they have the highest gpa the football team has had. the coach often visits classes the players are supposed to be in. if they are not there, bad news for them. they will do extra physical exercise. i think he communicates that their students first and then athletes. he brings me to meet to the recruits -- meet the recruits and their parents. the parents are particularly interested in what i have to sit. my message to the parents is, look, when you leave this place, people can take away your job, they can take away your car, they can take away your house, but they cannot take away your education. that is what we want your young men to get all they are here. it is great if they have a wonderful playing career, if they want to go professional, god bless them, but it is
important they leave here with a degree. athletes who have exhausted eligibility are graduating at a rate of 93%. [applause] >> how do you protect whistleblowers? >> really good question. one of the problems, retaliation can often be subtle. what you want to do is protect the subtle kinds of retaliation. when i hear something, and i will say, people who are whistle-blowers will often e- mail me directly or copy me on any now they have sent to somebody else. the first thing i do with that is to send it to the general counsel's office. i want to preserve the rights of the whistle-blower against retaliation. i think letting people know that that is what you will do is really your best policy. i will also say sometimes people falsely claim whistleblowing
because they are in a genuine discipline problem over something they have done in the workplace, and they want to use this as a rationalization. there are people who do need that protection. >> for three years in college, my father proofread and edited my papers. i never thought of this as treating and highly doubt he did. what do you think? >> i think it depends on the professor. in my own glasses, i say to students, it is fine with me if you consult with librarians are writing tutors or others, people who edit your work or give your suggestions about writing. i don't have a problem with that. but, the ideas and the final expression of those ideas, must be your own. in my class, that would not have been cheating. one of the things that is important is professors have to explain what their expectations are to the students. a problem we see pretty often happens in engineering class is for the students have been divided up into workgroups
through the semester, then you get to the final exam, and a professor understands that is to be independent work, but the students understand they can still work with their groups. those conflicting assumptions need to get addressed. we try to actually spend time training faculty as well as students about the honor code. the faculty know they have a serious responsibility to explain to students what they consider to be dishonest in this class. >> could you comment on grade inflation? isn't that a form of teacher cheating? is somethingation people of traced to the vietnam war. there's a fear that people who flunked out of college would immediately get drafted. i think it also had something to do with how good the quality of the entering students is. they genuinely are getting better. at least some faculty also are
seeking to take a mastery approach to the class. they want everybody in the class to learn the spanish conjugations. they want everybody to learn the calculus. they're willing to give students lots of rehearsal and practice to get them to that level of mastery. that may mean the grades will be higher in that class and otherwise. sometimes, faculty members are lazy about their grading. when they are, they're not giving students the preparation they need to go out in the world. shoddy work is not well received in the marketplace. a student to consistently submits shoddy work and gets a good grade for it is being sent the wrong message about what the world is like. i will say that it is not the complaint i get. i never got anything below an a in my life. what do you mean i am getting --
? >> is there a gender difference among cheaters? women are far less likely to cheat. they appear to be moving up, so to speak. men are still ahead in terms of those who admit to cheating. >> hard-working with your fraternities to emphasize honorable behavior? >> question. i had a meeting with the presidents of the fraternity this spring. in virginia, hazing is against the law. the university president is required to inform the, the attorney of the president is aware of an incident of hazing. i informed the printer -- the president that i had the, fraternity on speed dial and there would be no question if i heard about something that sounded like hazing, i would turn them in. we had a serious discussion about what membership is and
what pacing is. no one is willing to put up with facing these days. all alumni from their fraternity talk about what it is like in the old days. we had a very frank discussion about hazing. a lot of them knew the right thing to do. we had a good discussion about leadership. part of that leadership is academic integrity. i do think the honor code is prized by the members of our fraternities. i think we probably got somewhat less of an issue of the paternity test file, were all the tests are passed from brother to brother. i would not say it never existed. i also meet with the presidents of the sororities.
i have a somewhat different message for them. the behavior of worry about with sorority women is their lack of awareness when they are walking alone past midnight. when the bars closed at 2:00, there are a certain number of young women who would walk alone to their sorority house. even in charlottesville, which is pretty safe, that is not a completely safe behavior. that message was, people should walk in groups at night and not alone. it is for your own protection. we also talked about leadership with them. they also have their own issues. in terms of behavior problems, fraternity outranks a sorority almost any day of the week, especially saturday. >> why do so many colleges require essays on their application when it is so easy to cheat on? >> that is a really good question. you sometimes look of the students in -- student and say,
how did you get admitted? who wrote that for you? we have fought to overcome that with the writing portion of the s.a.t. it is done in the testing environment. you don't have the opportunity. some colleges have started evaluating that one more rigorously in terms of writing ability. the essay is also used for the student to reveal something about their background that does not appear in the application anywhere else. so, it is read as a way to learn more about the students as to learn about their writing ability. i agree that the notion of carefully tailored and edited and prepackaged essays is a real problem. >> how can we get an honor code for our politicians? [laughter] [applause]
>> that is a great question and i wish i knew the answer. i think it is very difficult in today's political climate. i admire the people willing to run for political office today because the vilification starts immediately. it is so personally destructive. thomas jefferson had the same problem in his election. as a result, he stopped reading newspapers in his second term as president. it is not a new problem with us. the notion of exaggeration if not downright lying, i think, is a real issue. i noticed some journalists have come to our assistance by producing truth meters in which they assess the relative degree of truth, or truthiness, of various political ads. that is one way we can try to put a check on the politicians.
i agree we have a serious issue with it. >> last question, how can we as parents or grandparents create an honor code in your family? >> that is a great question. you know, i think one of the best things you can do is to talk with children and grandchildren about what is important and why. it is important to us that the engineers were honest in the building bridges. otherwise, the bridges will fall in. it is important to us that the people we work for are honest in terms of payroll. we can get the money we need to get groceries. there are lots of ways a young child can understand why being honest is important. young children are often bothered by dishonesty and would like to talk to about it, but if you have not legitimate to the conversation, they won't bring it up. people like to follow baseball but they are troubled about
steroid use. they see that as teaching but they don't know if it is ok to talk about that because sports writers and others seem not to want to address a straightforwardly. you as a parent certainly can. i think talking about things that have happened in the press that raise issues of integrity or honor is a great way to get kids thinking along those lines. of course, if you have an option in terms of where they go to school, you can talk to the school administrators about how they inculcate the culture of integrity and what their policies are. these ways are very effective. a show by your own behavior that it is important to you. it might be the single best thing you can do. i thank you very much for being such a wonderful audience. [applause]
the american enterprise institute. tonight, we are featuring a special american enterprise debate. the advertisement refers to it as a student athlete reality check. the official debate question, which is what we will frame here, is the n.c.a.a. promoting education and amateurism in major division one sports programs, and if not, what is our response to be? we have -- let me introduce myself. i am tom miller with the american enterprise institute. all i was a one-time sports caster. i am volunteering tonight. i'm not being paid anything extra by aei to do this. no under the table payments. we have two excellent debaters
tonight. i do have to give you full disclosure. i did attend duke law school. it was put on probation and a basketball when a booster provided travel assistance to david thompson. we went on probation for your and we did not fit to recruit. -- we went on probation for a year and we did not get to recruit. we have dr. john lombardi, a professor of history at louisiana state university. he previously served in a number of academic roles, president of the lsu system, president of the university of florida, and provost of johns hopkins university. he is the author of dozens of books and articles. he served on many committees to advance the reform of collegiate structures in athletics and the n.c.a.a.. we also have taylor branch.
he is the pulitzer prize-winning journalist. he has a three-volume chronicle of the life of martin luther king jr. called "america in the king years." he is also more recently -- if we can get that up there on the screen -- is called "the cartel," which dispels corruption within the n.c.a.a. and what might be done to remedy it. we will just go briefly over the basic ground rules for tonight. they should not be that complex. i should tell you, i am not really a speaker tonight. i am just an official. [laughter] a timekeeper to enforce the rule. let's go through some of that. the opening statements will be eight minutes each. if anybody goes over, we will enforce those quite seriously.
the responses will be five minutes each. if anyone says anything a little on toward -- untoward, there will be penalties to be assessed afterward. then we will have some q&a from the audience. you should be able to see on the screen. i can tell you as well. you can send your questions in advance to was. you can send them by way of the e-mail. email@example.com. or, by twitter. #aeidebates. i believe that we have a coin flip before hand in order to economize on television time and get an extra commercial, but my understanding is taylor branch won the toss. he has elected to receive. dr. lombardi will be defending the bill to your right and my
immediate left. we will get started. it should be a great time. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, tom, and thanks to aei. i'm happy to engage in this discussion to get thought on the table on an issue that i think affects not only the government of sports but a growing crisis within higher education itself, over governance, how we think, how we regulate, how we define a potential bubble. all of higher education is having some trouble in many respects, and i think a good way to think about it is to focus on college sports. aei is in a proper place to have this debate. in one sense, it could be seen as a conflict between two core conservative principles, the free-market to govern how college board's works with and
higher education, as george will said, or as was the alternatives, the conservative principle is that some things are more important in the market. aristocracy, amateurism, that sort of thing, was the point view taken in "the new york times." the free market makes some sense, but some values are more important. amateurism is one of them. i'm honored to be with dr. lombardi. he is not only fellow historian, but he has written a lot more on this issue then i have. i kind of stumbled into this by trickery to do a short history of college sports in america. this is definitely a sideline for me. he is president of universities and he was the provost at johns
hopkins in baltimore, where i live. i have to honor him for that. he is ranked number three in the college football poll at lsu. he knows what he's talking about. he has practical experience. i have none. he is a reformer within the world of college sports. specifically, dr. lombardi has recently advocated that the scholarship level for athletes be raised, which is anathema to the smaller schools that feel they cannot afford it. he is also more significantly advocating that scholarships be guaranteed for athletes for their entire four years, which is even more anathema to big- time coaches who want the year by year scholarship roll to give them more control over the athletes. finally, he is also an advocate of reform in n.c.a.a. rules that capture in come from the sale of sports memorabilia and
everything foreign athletes entire lifetime, long after they leave school. that is the issue in the antitrust case that is working its way through the courts right now. he is a reformer on that as well, all of which would cause havoc with in the world of college sports. i admire him for that. but, he said every reform needs to be done within the bedrock principle of amateurism. i don't want to mince words. there are lots of things in reform of college sports about the governments of sports and how they should be done, and the balance, and what the faculty should do, and so forth. we can agree on all of those. on must be at least think about amateurism and what it -- unless we at least think about amateurism and what it means, all of this discussion is wasted breath. amateurism, in my view, is a bogus conceit that can only exist in the sport because it
has a long history and because part of the purpose of sports is that we don't have to think too hard. the purpose is to cheer and boo. that is what happens when we have contempt and admiration for the athletes. we tell them to shut up and do whatever they want. we recoil from the notion of amateurism without thinking how unique, how weird it is in our society to impose amateurism without consent on one segment of our population. not all students, only the students who are playing sports. i contend that until we think about that and can state a rationale for it, we cannot even begin to have a productive conversation about sports reform, let alone higher education reform. dr. lombardi says in one of his papers that the principle of amateurism is easy. if we sell student performance
as part of the sanctions package of college sports, it is ok. if the students don't -- it is not ok. if he calls that a principle. i think it is a distinction. it is far short of a principle. it takes no rational, no foundation. when you try to get to the authority, when you poke into the authority of college sports, you get circular arguments or reflexive arguments, famously in "sports illustrated," michael rosenberg told of interviewing the former president of the n.c.a.a. and having the most circular interview of his whole career. they cannot be paid. why? because they're amateurs. what makes the managers? well, they cannot be paid. why not? because they're amateurs. who decided they were amateurs?
we did. why? because we don't pay them. this goes round and round. it is not based on anything except history and privilege. the principle of amateurism, and this is a quote, is an abdication -- advocation, this is in bed rules, student athletes should be protected from exploitation by commercial enterprises. that might roll into your consciousness easily, but surely, it is a little bit odd to say it exploits somebody to pay them rather than not to pay them. this is an alice in wonderland notion that you are exploiting athletes if they receive any tangible benefits from the value
that they sacrifice and work hard to create with extraordinary talent and effort. the whole world is upside down. it is an alice in wonderland world. in calling these athletes amateurs. if colleges wanted to be consistent, they would say all students are amateurs. graduate students cannot be paid. teaching assistant. students cannot work in the campus bookstore, cannot be cashiers, cannot moonlight, cannot take part in work study programs, cannot do any of that, cannot start a small business. cannot start facebook and become a billionaire when they are at harvard. we would never dream of applying those roles to students at large, only to this one small group of athletes. you could not write a law, you could not going to a legislature
to do this in any state in the world for good reason. it is a logical. you would be thrown out of court. you'd be laughed at. you cannot specify this. the n.c.a.a. says they cannot receive any tangible benefit and that their relatives cannot. their mother cannot get a christmas card from an agent. it exercises and assumes a level of control exercised only in north korea. amateurism is a sham. it is an unexamined principle. thank you. >> ok. thank you very much. i appreciate that. clear, straightforward. let me first say something. the first thing is, this notion that the n.c.a.a. is a cartel is a problem for all of us because
it makes us think the wrong way about the enterprise, it is sure to be the worst cartel in america because 99.5% of them lose money. it is not a cartel. it is a franchising organization. the n.c.a.a. is an organization the university's invented in order to be able to create a standardized product of collegiate athletics to have standardized rules, operations, activities so that all the universities to participate in the franchise can have the same standardized product. the difference is with mcdonald's, it is a standardized product of the franchise. we all have the same stuff to do. a football fields are the same everywhere. rules are the same everywhere. we get to label it any way be blunt. we can put our name on it. we can promote it. we can sell it to our fans. we can do everything we want with the name pierre the product is a standardized product.
the n.c.a.a.'s assignment is to maintain that standardized product so that we cannot participate in this common endeavor. we are looking at ohio state, texas, $140 million business. playing the same games because they have the same standardized frame of reference. this is a very difficult thing to do. it is difficult because we invented this franchising system. there were not very many universities. the last 100 and some years, what has happened is the higher education business has exploded and expanded. the franchise businesses had to rearrange the rules of how we do franchising to try and match these dramatic changes in higher education. they should be divided up into divisions. we have division ia, we tried to
this case it -- tried to disguise it. now we have different levels of franchising operations. we still have the franchise. the challenge since day one has been that the people who like sports want to win. this is fundamental. they want to win. the other thing about people who want to win is, when you want banking, the securities business, people in america who want to win are willing to cheat in order to win. they're willing to do anything they can to win because they want to win. they will let this -- they will let them have standards and structures to reduce the amount of cheating that goes on to allow fair competition to take place. people can feel like they are being watched on the basis of
fairness. find an organization that has a better record of trying to maintain the structures. it is not the securities and exchange commission. it is not the regulation of the banking industry, which has collapsed under scandals. it does not the american bar association or the american medical association. they're doing pretty well. let me say something else. it is true that we have a big trouble maintaining what is amateurism. it is hard to maintain the amateur focus because everybody wants to make a buck off these big-time student-athletes. the problem is, the big-time student-athletes are a very tiny fraction of our franchise. very few. 430 student athletes in the franchise. 430,000 student athletes. that is a lot of kids.
they're all playing in a franchise. we believe in this stuff. it is very hard to manage. what you watch when you watched the evolution of the n.c.a.a., and don't forget, this is about the universities, the universities are the franchise, whatever is done is because the universities, their presence, their trustees, faculty, regulatory agencies, everybody is in favor of what is going on. there is nobody opting out. nobody is opting out. people are raising their hands. they get filled with wisdom and justice and truth and they go off and say, we don't need to play anymore. they don't do that. everybody needs to have justice and truth, just like us, so we don't have under competition. they just the rules of the franchise to make it work out. the first thing we should do is allow any student athlete who wants to go pro to go pro.
why do we wait? why do we restrict them? why do we slow it down? they want to make high school and go pro. why is it our business to interfere? congratulations. go. explore. do the best you can. go out and the approach. make a gazillion dollars. high-school, they're not competitive. they come to us. we have a little bit of a minor league operation here. football does not want to do the minor league operation. we do it for them. we tried to give these kids a chance because we know so few of them will go pro. but the numbers. practically none of them go pro. the chance of going pro and making a career in professional football is tiny compared to the number of student athletes.
most of them make reasonable progress. we have instituted rules and regulations to try and increase the focus on academics. i am all for making a minor league in football. football is not interested in that. baseball has the minor leagues. large numbers of our students get recruited and they're gone. the go to the professional leagues. congratulations. the go to the minor leagues. they play minor league ball. you want to be a pro? go into that. you want to go to the stock market? sell stock appeared make money. i'm in favor of all that for students. i just ran out of time. >> five minutes? thank you. i would say the one model for a competitive enterprise that manages intense competition in athletics without
disenfranchising the very people create the value is the olympics. the international olympics used to consider college sports constituted because they allowed, scholarships. the olympics banned it and said there was a tremendous conflict. the olympics expunged the word "amateur" from its dialogue shortly after the 1978 law in the united states that required athletes to be on every governing committee for the 39 olympic committees. no one could look across the table until the athletes that they should be on food stamps because there would be banished for life, like jesse owens, if they got a nickel for competing in the sports. there are models. franchisees a nice notion. the n.c.a.a. is a cartel in the sense that they have artificial rules agreed to by the schools
to penalize anybody, any athlete, receives or any university grants one nickel above the agreed stipend. that is enormously significant. it is true. only 1% of the college athletes ever go pro. the flip side of that is that 99% of the athletes who have been devoting their lives to the sports and their bodies and are all beat up, the college experience is the only opportunity in their whole lifetime to get a nest egg out of the value they are creating. it is enormous. for one month, to run march madness, a cbs turner sports called -- paid directly $771 million for running the tournament. they paid the teams that participated in the tournament and a subsidized the schools with what is left over after the n.c.a.a. takes its own cut,
which is why there are construction cranes in indianapolis today, and private airplanes. all of this is because the athletes themselves don't get any of that money. the n.c.a.a. was terrified in the 1990's when there were rumors that one team might refuse to walk out on the court. national obsession. all the networks for their. $771 million at stake. this is generated by the rules of the n.c.a.a. that say that the students have no stake in their own enterprise. they cannot be members of the n.c.a.a.. they have no voice. they cannot vote appeared to have some rights. the structure is fundamentally unbalanced. look at it this way. for 1100 out of the 1200 n.c.a.a. schools, it did not matter particle if you -- we
will no longer demonize students who ask for compensation for what they do. i am not saying every student should be paid. i don't believe they should. i don't think they should be demonized for asking for compensation if they are producing enormous value, either. right now, 1100 schools support amateurism rules that benefit only the n.c.a.a. itself and the big-time schools like lsu that get to keep the money to hire more strength and conditioning coaches, and then have the gall to say, we're doing it for your own good so you can enjoy the blessings of amateurism. that is how it works. all the n.c.a.a.'s money comes from basketball. none comes from football because in 1984, the football schools went to the supreme court and said, it is on american. the rule that was a cartel and struck down the n.c.a.a. rules.
the n.c.a.a. has all licenses. they're struggling. that is what the football playoffs are all about their terrified that if this works, they can say, we cannot run march madness without the $707 million. there tremendous practical problems. underneath all of that, their basic problems of principle. athletes are excluded. you can see it in the penn state penalties the went down. everybody was saying that penn state was hit hard. logically, those penalties would have said, penn state has 20 fewer assistant coaches, 20 fewer assistance to the president, 24 assistance to the athletic director, all the
people who failed and enabled. instead, who did it penalized? scholarships for people who are still in high school and had nothing to do with it. that is because the n.c.a.a. concentrates all the power in precisely those offices that committed these crimes. >> i think one of the things that we need to pay attention to is this notion that struggling student athletes -- now, i know we are supposed to feel sorry for people who are given a full scholarship bride who have nothing but academics, who receive all of the equipment and travel and support, training support, available to anybody in the western world, and put them on a stage where they can display their talents in such joy that it increases, especially in football, their value, and in the going to the draft, which they can do it anytime. nobody stops them from going into the draft.
i don't feel sorry for the student athletes. i speak to my students in my classes and we talk about the way in which it is structured, the sport structure, and i say, what do you think about that? what do you think about the structure and what you get for being a participant in an extracurricular activity? let me think about that. i think it is a pretty damn good deal. it is a very, very good deal. them.we're already paying we can increase the amount. we have to figure out how we're going to pay them. i think what we ought to do is pay something like tim tebow $5 million a year. i think that is reasonable. i think that is the way we ought to deal with students. i think what we try to do is run the university with a reasonable amount of fairness as best we can. we try to support what it is we do. this is not a simple business.
this is an expensive business. all of these programs, except for a few, 20 at most, in the division ia, are losing money. they're supporting the sports that are not on television, track and field, olympic sports, tennis, all this stuff. we can say we don't like the way the system is organized because it transfers money from the big money sports to the small money sports. it is a transfer process. this is what we do in america. graduated income tax. the american enterprise institute probably thinks that is a bad idea. it here, that is what we do. we transfer money from the people were making a to support the people who are not making it because the franchise businesses organized as a program. the concept of intercollegiate athletics is that we support a program that has a defined number of sports. you have to have all of the
sports to participate in the franchise. that means you cnot put all your money on football or basketball or whatever your big- time sport is. you have to support the mom. the level of support you have to provide is part of this process. create programs that support the extracurricular activities of the students. they' getting a pretty good deal. i don't like to fill sorry for them. i don't feel sorry for them. we had an honor student at the university. he does not have as good of the scotia. if they do not make a b average, he loses his scholarship. maybe there should be a four- year scholarship. four-year scholarship for student athlete, i don't have any problem with that.
the program will not pick up the cost. it will be picked up someplace else in the university. we can make it better. we could say we really don't want to have this competition the way it is. we don't want to try and maintain amateurism. we ought to try and have our student athletes actually be students. we don't want to try to keep them in class or try to keep them eligible. we don't need to do that. we want to pay them for performance. we provide support. they can play and participate in the activities of university. could it be better? sure, it could be better. the franchise is increasingly increased. lot to saye a whole about this argument. i think there's something to be said about a lawsuit for those who are using images in the future. that is what they ought to
discuss. i think the enterprise has to continue to get better every single year. it has to keep responding to the changes taking place in the environment. let me say, any of you who watch intercollegiate sports on television, you are the cause of all of this money. [laughter] >> that is quite an opening round. we have some questions from our audience coming in my e-mail and by twitter. given that we have about 20 minutes, we probably will not be taking more than the ones we have already digested. one of the questions was asking the basic issue, given how much that universities are under fiscal pressure, making ends meet for an expensive enterprise, how realistic is
reform of what is one of the more positive revenue-generating sources of a college within the limits of the bottom line? >> i cannot seem to get this through anybody's head. hardly anybody makes any money from intercollegiate sports. we don't do intercollegiate sports to make money. we make money so we can do as much with intercollegiate sports as we possibly can appear there 22 programs out of 1100 that make money here the rest of them are losing their shirts to varying degrees. the percentage by which they are losing their shirts has not changed a whole lot. on the average, it runs at about 5%. i have got to tell you, the idea that we do sports to make money is like saying we do research to make money. both of them lose money. we do them for the reasons. the reason we do them as not to make money. we want to make as much money as possible for intercollegiate
sports to subsidize the deficit and make the deficit less than it would otherwise be. there is no way we will make a profit on intercollegiate sports and solve the budgetary problems that most universities. quite the contrary. as we lose more and more money in intercollegiate sports, it will put more pressure on the universities to try and do something about the cost structure of intercollegiate sports. >> the "side of that is, basically, if there is not the revenue gusher from the major sports, or it is being paid to the players, the revenue transfer, what happens to the rest of the college sports program without that subsidy? >> you confront that question honestly and straightforwardly with all the stakeholders having a say in it rather than the way it is done now, which is by -- what it does is it creates -- we have a casino mentality where money comes in from the big revenue sport and a softball
coach comes in and says, you get all this money, i want part of it. you have $300,000 softball coaches. lists everything, but it is all artificial, phony, and off the backs of the revenue athletes without their consent. >> dr. lombardi talked about one alternative, which is basically, pay the superstar is a lot of money. it is almost like having a franchise player, in the nfl, their free agents. what is the alternative structure for compensation? we will have collective bargaining. will we have a minimum salary with in the players? people can get bonuses if they do special things? what would be an alternative structure where some of the money came back to those performing on the field? >> the alternative structure is simple. you say amateurism no longer exists, and everybody has to deal with the consequences openly. athletes can come in. the volleyball player can say, i want $10,000 above my scholarship and the university
is free to laugh. the system would otherwise dissolve naturally. the way it is now, every one presumes we must be satisfied the system is there before we give rights to the people who are producing all the value and risking their lives. it does not make sense. the change is simple. acknowledge that amateurism is bogus. it has been grafted on from the 19th century when amateurism and we are all gentleman and we won't allow anybody from the working trades to participate in the olympics. when tv money started generating millions, we said it was an excuse to control the system and essentially say, we colleges cannot afford not to rob these athletes. that is basically what it boils down to. i cannot get anybody to say what is the foundational justification for imposing amateurism on people without their consent. >> dr. lombardi seemed to suggest that the n.c.a.a. is only exploiting a few.
maybe the superstars, who could make more money, and that benefits others. you seem to be saying you are exploiting quite a lot of them -- athletes. >> i don't think that is true. i don't think we are in the business of exploiting anybody. we're in the business of providing opportunities for people there would not otherwise have. people want to be professionals, they should be professionals. we are trying to have students super dissipate in intercollegiate at -- activity. -- have students who participate in intercollegiate activity. we can increase the quality we support rigid quality of support was due back a spirit we could put them in the open marketplace -- we can increase the quality of support we give students. we could put them in the open marketplace. there was all kinds of bad stuff going on. over the years, the institutions have gradually put
in place, responding to reach crisis and issue, mechanisms to try to sustain the quality, the fairness, and the even structure of intercollegiate sports. it may mean they are having too much money a long way. it may mean the big time football programs will bake -- break the bank. there are times in the history of the n.c.a.a. when it looked at the big time football program, they're going to break it. go independent. they could. there is no question that all. they could decide, we will run on our own n.c.a.a.. we don't need you guys. why should we support the second-rate teams? why should we maintain rules that don't allow us to use our financial power to drive ourselves into the media marketplace and make a gazillion dollars? they don't do that for two reasons. the n.c.a.a. and all the participants continually revise the structure to try to
accommodate at different levels the play that involves the n.c.a.a. the second thing is the big-time programs no --know that when they go pro, they become a minor leak. they become a minor professional league. everybody knows the minor professional league sucks. it is bad stuff. they pay players a little more, but it is bad stuff. how many of you people don't want minor league baseball? lots of you, i am sure. you are all out there watching minor league baseball. that is why it has a big tv audience. people are not watching arena football. give me a break. we have a product that has high value that we try and use to spread the benefits of the enthusiasm for the big money sports to as many students as possible, as many institutions as possible. if you don't want to play in this franchise, join -- there is
no requirement to stay in the n.c.a.a. to mind if you think you are singing songs, playing frisbee, that is what you want to do, "join them. >> i am sorry, i heard a lot of condescension toward student athletes and toward the college athletes in that. the courts have ruled that these are effective monopolies. otherwise, you would not have these roles. you would not be generating $771 million. these sports are popular not because everybody believes they are amateurs. that is what people said the olympics would drive. people barely noticed. they are popular because they are connected to traditions. they are young people connected to their school. they're producing an amazingly non-amateur, a wonderful product out there that captivates people. the notion of student athlete is a fiction created by the
n.c.a.a. to buy its own admission to beat workman compensation cases in court. it is kind of a neither here nor there, neither students nor athlete. mca -- n.c.a.a. repeat that phrase because it is their jurisdiction. it is not that complicated. just like ending amateurism, the basis of all of our contempt for the dirty athlete, get rid of that. as say they are entitled to just as much as you and i, to seek compensation for what we do well. students to play sports in college at a high level our students and athletes. they're just like any other two- career person. they should, if there functioning well in both spheres, the college is responsible for making them bonafide athletes. the n.c.a.a. performs well in that regard.
their athletes. they work 40, 60 hours a week as athletes. they have to work as students. a lot of them are not that well endowed academically. they deserve enormous respect beyond the accolades they get on the field. we give them boos and whispers and condescension. shut up. your world -- you're lucky to get your scholarship. i think it is american. >> we have almost been debating two topics. should there be amateurs? can there be amateurs? the other debate is, what we think of the n.c.a.a.? can we have amateurism without the n.c.a.a. as it is currently structured? is it too intertwined? maybe that is the problem of supporting both of the same time? >> that is the point to -- of the exercise. see if it is possible to have them operating at a highly
competitive standardized internment. it is not possible. it may be that the pressure of television and media, all that other stuff, will eventually break the bank. that may happen. the n.c.a.a. has been through the universities with their franchising group and has been through subsequent crises after another trying to adjust to changes. we had to learn how to deal with women. we had to learn how to deal with minorities. we had to learn how to deal with all kinds of people we did not have to deal with. the idea of intercollegiate sports was invented by a elite white guys. there are a lot of elite white guys left. who is up here? white guys. intercollegiate sports was invented by elite white guys. they have had to move from what they wanted to get more diverse, to introduce women, those of you
who follow title 9, everybody dug in and said, we don't want it, the end of the world as we know it. the world will end. the world did not actually and. what happened was we got a whole bunch of high-powered women student-athletes. who would of thought in 1972 that we would end up here with 43% of our student-athletes women? not quite 50-50 yet. 43% is spectacular. if you look at what is going on in high schools and secondary schools as a result of this opportunity at the university's invented, they did it. the result is that this enterprise that we don't like, this enterprise generated revenue that made possible to support the women's sports. i would be happy to see another model put on the table that would be functional. an operationto get worse than what we have now. i think it would break the bank.
i think it would break the institutions. that might be a good thing. that might be the goal of the enterprise, to see if we can break the relationship. i think it would be a big loss. everybody pays attention to the top level. they are on tv all the time. you wonder what we invest for those people to be on television. look of what the university put in to make possible these incredible platforms on which the student athletes are able to project their skills and abilities so they can increase their value when they go pro. depend on how you calculate it, it could be up to hundreds of thousands of dollars a year of value for an athlete in the big time with all the support provided. it allows the program to succeed. the program is the key to the success of this enterprise. the day you say there's one part of the program that will operate in a professional group, and one
section will not, you will have a different business. i don't like the business better. >> someone is coming after you. they sent in question. i did not come up with this question. they said, how do you feel about the greatest academic scandal in n.c.a.a. history? this is flowing out of the football program, where there were sanctions. there is the dilution of the academic standard. how do we see that happening in some of these big college programs, where it looks like they're being educated, but they're not being educated? like they are being educated, but they're not been educated >> i fear terrible and pray that it does not see into the basketball program before this year. but it is a fairy tale liffey think that most big-time sports programs don't operate the same way. i have taught at colleges -- a fairy tale if you think that
most big-time sports programs don't operate the same way. i have taught at colleges. i am off the list -- the function of the athletic department is to steer kids into courses that can keep them eligible. that is why the notion that the n.c.a.a. is in charge of the student athletes and that that is the solution is so false. the university in ambiguous they should be in charge of whether the student is a student. it is already separated, dr. lombardi. we have a commercialized, high monetized system and it's only distinction that it excludes the value part of -- excludes value by large artificially. you cannot say that this is
empowering and enriching ones were going pro and say that only 1% of them are going pro. all of these athletes are generating value. the guards, the interior linemen are generating value in the big game. they are all being invited to play. the third string player is getting money just like tim t. bowen they steal the money around them and they are in code -- like to empty bow -- like tim tebow and they see all this money around them and they are encouraged to fantasize. >> taylor has written a lot about the commercialization of images in ways that the universities will profit for
decades after the fact whereas the players are long since gone. you sometimes look at other market mechanisms that might able to change these incentives around. when about deferred comp? -- what about deferred cop? -- deferred comp? >> whether you pay them before or behind, they're not stupid. they're getting paid. in our effort to try to maintain the separation of the intercollegiate sports enterprise and the commercial enterprise, we have a tough time succeeding with that, in part because of the enormous media attention provided, which generate all this stuff. so we have some rules that are very difficult to take seriously. we have one rule this is you cannot commercialize the name of a student athlete.
so you buy a sweatshirt with his number on it. who are we fooling? when you saw the skirmish -- when you saw the sweatshirt with number on it, who does the represent? that represents tim tebow. there could be a model to deal with this. let me give you an example. we produce something like $14 million a year in intellectual property returns on licenses and patents and royalties and that kind of thing. that is another business of the university. that is a college business. so the college students and the postdoc students are not paid. they are all paid a flat rate, whatever the grant provides print and it is a crappy money. they would like to have the deals that student athletes have. they make it possible for us to produce this terrific scientific
out pos. maybe down the line, it could make a gazillion dollars, but we don't know. student athlete in the university of florida does not know if you will end up with a contract with gazillion dollars. you have to try to pay attention to how you do that. you might say that, when we have a lot of money on an image, whether it is ea sports or someone else is using it, then they get paid after being student athletes been not ahead of time or giving them in havence, but after they bea been a student athlete. it seems to me that we have a license agreement for participating in the project. there are a lot of rules about who and how we participate in
this. i think we probably ought to pay attention to that kind of a conversation. >> we are coming up on our closing statements. you have five minutes apiece to wrapup. >> thank you. this is a very complicated topic. it is burdened with a lot of history and a lot of reflects actions. the hard part for me was to get past the notion that everybody that i ever talked to outside of the college athletic locker room feels that we presume that we should have a say on how this thing should be structured before debating what the primary role of the people who are actually producing this value is. we presume to settle questions of their rights. by and large, we bounced off of
those questions. to me, that is scary. as an echo, as a civil rights historian and a racial historian for closing and some were the colonials said they're doing all of this for the best intentions of the natives. i got on it into a lot of trouble on steven colbert when he asked me if college athletes were slaves are not. of course not. they are in some ways, as dr. lombardi says, privilege. they have the opportunity to do this. but it is also true that nobody wants to state the principle by which their rights are uniquely a bridge in our society. we bounce off of that. that to me is an echo of slavery. because nobody wants to deal with the abolitionist even after the end of the civil war, not because we thought the abolitionists were wrong, but because we were afraid the
abolition ears were right. -- that the abolitioners were right. i have a three-point agenda that i think will apply to the future trouble the education as well as the future of sports. i will now read it here, but it is my last bid. if your interested, i brought all of these cards. transparency and balance -- transparency is a big problem for actual information. most colleges don't really have information and tell me they don't have accurate information on all of the contracts and promotional things that are going on in the athletic department. but transparency should include all the stakeholders, including faculty and everybody involved in government. second principle, the academic mission with an intercollegiate sports at a high level -- we need to get all of the stake holders at the table. the system needs to be open,
transparent. maybe you cannot do it, but at least it should be (the third and the only one i will read is equity. if you don't deal with equity and you don't deal with it successfully, all the rest is wasted breath and you're just waiting for the course or some collapse to change the system exogenous lee without dealing with the principle. to me, equity is the important one. colleges and universities show respect the basic rights of all students, applied consistently to athletes and non-athletes alike, on campus as under the law, both students will obtain the full attributes of citizenship. this includes the rights and duties of full consent, representative government and a process. no french of the bridge because of athletics that this -- athletic status. -- no right shelby abridged because of athletic status all
legitimate enterprise coming therefore separate from their school. tell me on what basis you object to that and you can build the n.c.a.a. on the back of that lease whose rights are uniquely abridged and is festering along with the other problems in higher education because the place that is supposed to have brave thought does everything by assumption and that is the very thing that it lacks. confront the basic definitions. that is where government and reform starts. thank you. >> ok, i think there is a misconception out there that there is some of some secret stuff going on. and there may be. most of it goes on in private universities because we cannot see what they do. but for any of the big public universities involved, everything they do is available under public information and the
newspapers are good at that. stuff i don't have, they can get and give it to me. the n.c.a.a. it provides an extraordinary amount of information to the universities that are a part of their enterprise. it may be that the presidents don't pay attention and maybe they don't watch and maybe they do want to know. there are all kinds of reasons that people don't pay attention to information that is available. but those who want to know where the money is and who is getting paid what and want to know how the institutions rank in terms of what they spend and what the deficits are and where they are generated -- if they want to know where the money is spent and where it comes from, all of that is detailed in enormous detail. secondly, the n.c.a.a. is not a secret enterprise. it is run by the university presidents and they bring an athletic directors and coaches and other people to provided by some council, especially on the rules and regulations of the game. but the main role of how the thing up bridges done by the university presidents.
now, if the university presidents and their trustees and their regulatory agencies and a faculty are willing to change the enterprise, all have to do is change it. and every change that has happened in the n.c.a.a. in the last 110 years has been driven by the president's deciding that the time has come to do something different in a different way. so the idea that you can attack the n.c.a.a. and somehow fix this misses the point. he has a good point. the point is that it is a higher education problem, not an n.c.a.a. problem. we are the n.c.a.a.. the universities do the n.c.a.a.. the rules are cast by the presidents. they're the ones to make the decisions. the conferences are run by the presidents. the fcc is run by the president. if the president's don't want to do something, then it does not happen. so when they say, why don't the president's get involved, i will tell you why. because the trustees don't get involved. people who on the universities,
the trustees, the legislature, those people, they don't want them to change it very much. no. 2, the constituencies of the university, the fans, the alumni, the friends, they don't want us to change what the universities do. will then you want to make the n.c.a.a. fix all this, you have the wrong target. the enemy is us. it is us, the university's pin is us, the fans. it is us, all of you who watch it on television and by the tickets at outrageous prices and by skyboxes. you are the people who make the enterprise what it is today and you should take full responsibility for your participation when you wrap this all up and you put it on the news and it is the only academic enterprise that has its own section in the newspaper -- sports. does the history of a department have a section in the newspaper? hell no. you have a bad day lecture, do they write you of?
no, they don't. are you on the front page of the news? no, you are not. and who makes that possible? the ones who want the sports enterprise to be the way it is. the miracle is that the universities and the n.c.a.a. resisted as many pressures as they have and have been capable of sustaining the simmons enterprise that has no counterpart anywhere else in the world and have managed to provide this huge base of support for so many years in a standardized and effective franchising system. >> all right, i think we have had a highly competitive activity. a lot of points were put up on the board. upon further review, i have decided to take people egg off the field. please thank our debaters. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]